1 3 5 6 7 8 9 12 13
Topic: Ron Paul
yellowrose10's photo
Sat 04/04/09 09:17 PM
entertainment?

Drivinmenutz's photo
Sat 04/04/09 09:18 PM






I like Paul, but he doesn't articulate his positions very well.

If he was a better speaker, he would have garnered many more votes than he did.


Actually I agree with you on that, I listened to a couple of his speeches and almost feel asleep. No offense to those that like him, but too bad he didn't have Obama's flare for speeches. I did like what I heard before I dropped out. LOL

Actually I wanted to hear what Fanta and Drivin where engaged in in the other topic but here instead of Fanta and Drivin are up to it.

I will check back in the morning to see what was said.


Thing is i really didn't want to make it a debate. But without attacking anyone, i would like to hear where the problems are in his logic or his teachings. So if Fanta, or anyone doesn't mind, i am up for it.


Driven,
Haven't we had this debate before, and agreed to disagree?
My reasons and beliefs on Ron Paul haven't changed.
Have yours?

I dont think you and I have reason to
rehash our differences.

Esp. not because one of us is called out.drinker


I know bro, i know.

I guess what i was trying to do is explore the other side to the coin some more. I just want to find out where his logic failed. I believe you brought up the Depression of 1857 or 1890, or something like that right? How that caused a need for a Federal Reserve.

Just not quite sure i guess how the federal reserve solved that problem. Unless, maybe you account inflation as a redistribution of wealth method... But why a national Bank? Why should we have to increase our national debt every time we print money?

So i guess my questions aren't so much about Dr. Paul, but more about my own understanding of the system...

This isn't about me against you. But you do have much more logical arguments than most. And i like your skeptical approach. If you want to avoid this for fear of offending eachother i will, no questions asked...




Im sure we will debate in other threads, Brother, but
I refuse to do it just for entertainment.


Follow Me!


drinks

Dragoness's photo
Sat 04/04/09 09:23 PM




Don't know much of him but I heard him briefly one time and did not like what I heard. He fit the average republican to me.

Republican idealogy that is not productive for this country is what has caused them to be voted out and I see that trend staying put for a while because they DO NOT HAVE THE AVERAGE AMERICAN'S WELL BEING AT HEART AT ANY LEVEL.


Why do you say that? What went against the average american? And if he fit the typical republican profile, why does he disagree with the majority of republicans, and refuse to endorse their electy party nominee?


Their ideology is too far right ( for lack of a better way of describing it).

Republicans for the most part have a stuck ideology that is out dated. Their ideology does not allow for the changing environment of man.

One example: Religion in politics. Republicans believe that religion should have a large active role in politics. This no longer fits the way the population believes.

Ron Paul believes this same philosophy.


Where does he mention any religion in his arguments? Where does he want to push ANY of his personal beliefs on people?


This is the first one I clicked on:

The War on Religion

by Rep. Ron Paul, MD
by Rep. Ron Paul, MD



As we celebrate another Yuletide season, it’s hard not to notice that Christmas in America simply doesn’t feel the same anymore. Although an overwhelming majority of Americans celebrate Christmas, and those who don’t celebrate it overwhelmingly accept and respect our nation’s Christmas traditions, a certain shared public sentiment slowly has disappeared. The Christmas spirit, marked by a wonderful feeling of goodwill among men, is in danger of being lost in the ongoing war against religion.

Through perverse court decisions and years of cultural indoctrination, the elitist, secular Left has managed to convince many in our nation that religion must be driven from public view. The justification is always that someone, somewhere, might possibly be offended or feel uncomfortable living in the midst of a largely Christian society, so all must yield to the fragile sensibilities of the few. The ultimate goal of the anti-religious elites is to transform America into a completely secular nation, a nation that is legally and culturally biased against Christianity.

This growing bias explains why many of our wonderful Christmas traditions have been lost. Christmas pageants and plays, including Handel’s Messiah, have been banned from schools and community halls. Nativity scenes have been ordered removed from town squares, and even criticized as offensive when placed on private church lawns. Office Christmas parties have become taboo, replaced by colorless seasonal parties to ensure no employees feel threatened by a “hostile environment.” Even wholly non-religious decorations featuring Santa Claus, snowmen, and the like have been called into question as Christmas symbols that might cause discomfort. Earlier this month, firemen near Chicago reluctantly removed Christmas decorations from their firehouse after a complaint by some embittered busybody. Most noticeably, however, the once commonplace refrain of “Merry Christmas” has been replaced by the vague, ubiquitous “Happy Holidays.” But what holiday? Is Christmas some kind of secret, a word that cannot be uttered in public? Why have we allowed the secularists to intimidate us into downplaying our most cherished and meaningful Christian celebration?

The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers. On the contrary, our Founders’ political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs. Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God, would be aghast at the federal government’s hostility to religion. The establishment clause of the First Amendment was simply intended to forbid the creation of an official state church like the Church of England, not to drive religion out of public life.

The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America, with churches serving as vital institutions that would eclipse the state in importance. Throughout our nation’s history, churches have done what no government can ever do, namely teach morality and civility. Moral and civil individuals are largely governed by their own sense of right and wrong, and hence have little need for external government. This is the real reason the collectivist Left hates religion: Churches as institutions compete with the state for the people’s allegiance, and many devout people put their faith in God before their faith in the state. Knowing this, the secularists wage an ongoing war against religion, chipping away bit by bit at our nation’s Christian heritage. Christmas itself may soon be a casualty of that war.


December 30, 2003

Dr. Ron Paul is a Republican member of Congress from Texas.

http://digg.com/d18Jx7


There is no attack on religion in this country, if religion would step back into the place it belongs in, at home.

Religion has overstepped it's boundaries in this country for far too long.

People do not mind that people want to have religion at home but they want people to respect that not everyone is religious or has the same religion that they do.

Christians will not even recognize that Christmas was a pagan holiday before it was a Christian one and that not everyone wants to celebrate it as Christmas. They won't even accept a comprimise of respecting everyone by saying Happy Holidays instead of Merry Christmas because they are so used to being allowed cart blanc in this country.

Ron Paul buys into this because he is too far right for the average American.

Drivinmenutz's photo
Sat 04/04/09 09:27 PM
So the fact that he wants people to be allowed to freely express their religion means that he is bringing religion into politics?

I ask, should muslim children not be allowed to pray at school when his or her religion requires?

All Ron Paul was asking for is tolerance. Did anyone else see anything different?

Drivinmenutz's photo
Sat 04/04/09 09:30 PM
Personally someone that would be offended at a "Merry Christmas" has little to no character at all, and thinks the world should bend to his or her will.

Think about it. If someone in their own religion said good day, how the hell can that be offensive by any sane person?

AndrewAV's photo
Sat 04/04/09 09:35 PM

So the fact that he wants people to be allowed to freely express their religion means that he is bringing religion into politics?

I ask, should muslim children not be allowed to pray at school when his or her religion requires?

All Ron Paul was asking for is tolerance. Did anyone else see anything different?


Exactly. he is using Christianity as an example because it is a large sample of the population and what he knows best. Ron Paul is far from judging anyone on religious grounds and has done nothing but promote the tolerance of others, even while holding conflicting beliefs himself. That is what makes him a great man - he does not put himself ahead of what he feels is right.

Drivinmenutz's photo
Sat 04/04/09 09:38 PM


So the fact that he wants people to be allowed to freely express their religion means that he is bringing religion into politics?

I ask, should muslim children not be allowed to pray at school when his or her religion requires?

All Ron Paul was asking for is tolerance. Did anyone else see anything different?


Exactly. he is using Christianity as an example because it is a large sample of the population and what he knows best. Ron Paul is far from judging anyone on religious grounds and has done nothing but promote the tolerance of others, even while holding conflicting beliefs himself. That is what makes him a great man - he does not put himself ahead of what he feels is right.


drinker drinker drinker

Dragoness's photo
Sat 04/04/09 09:40 PM

So the fact that he wants people to be allowed to freely express their religion means that he is bringing religion into politics?

I ask, should muslim children not be allowed to pray at school when his or her religion requires?

All Ron Paul was asking for is tolerance. Did anyone else see anything different?


He is not asking for tolerance, he is asking for us to go back in time to a time of religious majority because he thinks it is a "better" time.

Republican equals stuck in the mud of old times not allowing for the changing humanity. We are not what we used to be any more and good riddance as far as I am concerned. There were way to many prejudice ideals in the old ways, too much religious dogma, etc.....

Ron Paul equals old stuck in the mud ideals that we have outgrown and need to dispel.

yellowrose10's photo
Sat 04/04/09 09:40 PM
Edited by yellowrose10 on Sat 04/04/09 09:46 PM
Christians will not even recognize that Christmas was a pagan holiday before it was a Christian one and that not everyone wants to celebrate it as Christmas. They won't even accept a comprimise of respecting everyone by saying Happy Holidays instead of Merry Christmas because they are so used to being allowed cart blanc in this country.

Ron Paul buys into this because he is too far right for the average American.


this is a generalization. and I didn't see him be anything but tolerant. so what if someone says merry christmas...some people take it as an offense. i would not be offended if someone wished me good will for whatever their traditions are

Drivinmenutz's photo
Sat 04/04/09 09:45 PM


So the fact that he wants people to be allowed to freely express their religion means that he is bringing religion into politics?

I ask, should muslim children not be allowed to pray at school when his or her religion requires?

All Ron Paul was asking for is tolerance. Did anyone else see anything different?


He is not asking for tolerance, he is asking for us to go back in time to a time of religious majority because he thinks it is a "better" time.

Republican equals stuck in the mud of old times not allowing for the changing humanity. We are not what we used to be any more and good riddance as far as I am concerned. There were way to many prejudice ideals in the old ways, too much religious dogma, etc.....

Ron Paul equals old stuck in the mud ideals that we have outgrown and need to dispel.


What specificly made you think he wanted us to use religion as a way of life again?


You see i got the impression that he was just promoting tolerance. Like allowing the muslims to pray when they need to. Allowing Christians to say merry christmas, etc. Instead of exercising a Phobia of religion by being forced to be religiously neutral. Wouldn't it be culturally educating to let people practice his or her own religions openly? As long as you are respectful.

Drivinmenutz's photo
Sat 04/04/09 10:01 PM


this is a generalization. and I didn't see him be anything but tolerant. so what if someone says merry christmas...some people take it as an offense. i would not be offended if someone wished me good will for whatever their traditions are


I agree with this philosophy. If a gesture was intended to be kind then take it as a kind gesture. It's about maturity.

yellowrose10's photo
Sat 04/04/09 10:01 PM
if someone told me happy winter solstice...i'd take as a greeting not an offense.

Dragoness's photo
Sat 04/04/09 10:09 PM
Edited by Dragoness on Sat 04/04/09 10:28 PM



So the fact that he wants people to be allowed to freely express their religion means that he is bringing religion into politics?

I ask, should muslim children not be allowed to pray at school when his or her religion requires?

All Ron Paul was asking for is tolerance. Did anyone else see anything different?


He is not asking for tolerance, he is asking for us to go back in time to a time of religious majority because he thinks it is a "better" time.

Republican equals stuck in the mud of old times not allowing for the changing humanity. We are not what we used to be any more and good riddance as far as I am concerned. There were way to many prejudice ideals in the old ways, too much religious dogma, etc.....

Ron Paul equals old stuck in the mud ideals that we have outgrown and need to dispel.


What specificly made you think he wanted us to use religion as a way of life again?


You see i got the impression that he was just promoting tolerance. Like allowing the muslims to pray when they need to. Allowing Christians to say merry christmas, etc. Instead of exercising a Phobia of religion by being forced to be religiously neutral. Wouldn't it be culturally educating to let people practice his or her own religions openly? As long as you are respectful.



The problem is they monopolize the holiday as if it theirs. They want Christmas stuff up but do not put up ALL RELIGIOUS SYMBOLS OF THE HOLIDAY at their public displays which is discriminatory. If you are respectful to ALL you have to include ALL, if not there can be nothing so that all religions are respected, understood?

He was not teaching tolerance, he was bashing those who will not allow the Christians the cart blance they are used to. You notice he states that " THE OLD TRADITIONS AND FEELING OF THE HOLIDAY ARE GONE". We have allowed Christianity too much power in this country and it has taken too much advantage of it and now feels put out by not being given the complete power they had before.

Ron Paul buys into this and it doesn't represent the average American anymore.

This is but one example by the way.

willing2's photo
Sat 04/04/09 10:11 PM
From what I read on his site is, he's doing more of a presidential job than Obama.
Up to Date, informative, calling for actions that would benefit the people. Urging people to get involved by making phone calls and submitting protest letters to the Reps and Congress.
If he don't get too danged old and people wake up to the corruption going on from the Top down, he could be a choice Americans, not the Media, vote in.
On the other hand, if Obama and his crew screw up bad enough, Ron Paul could be the alternative to step in and represent the people.

Drivinmenutz's photo
Sat 04/04/09 10:11 PM




So the fact that he wants people to be allowed to freely express their religion means that he is bringing religion into politics?

I ask, should muslim children not be allowed to pray at school when his or her religion requires?

All Ron Paul was asking for is tolerance. Did anyone else see anything different?


He is not asking for tolerance, he is asking for us to go back in time to a time of religious majority because he thinks it is a "better" time.

Republican equals stuck in the mud of old times not allowing for the changing humanity. We are not what we used to be any more and good riddance as far as I am concerned. There were way to many prejudice ideals in the old ways, too much religious dogma, etc.....

Ron Paul equals old stuck in the mud ideals that we have outgrown and need to dispel.


What specificly made you think he wanted us to use religion as a way of life again?


You see i got the impression that he was just promoting tolerance. Like allowing the muslims to pray when they need to. Allowing Christians to say merry christmas, etc. Instead of exercising a Phobia of religion by being forced to be religiously neutral. Wouldn't it be culturally educating to let people practice his or her own religions openly? As long as you are respectful.



The problem is they monopolize the holiday as if it theirs. They want Christmas stuff up but do put up ALL RELIGIOUS SYMBOLS OF THE HOLIDAY at their public displays. If you are respectful to ALL you have to include ALL, if not there can be nothing so that all religions are respected, understood?

He was not teaching tolerance, he was bashing those who will not allow the Christians the cart blance they are used to. You notice he states that " THE OLD TRADITIONS AND FEELING OF THE HOLIDAY ARE GONE". We have allowed Christianity too much power in this country and it has taken too much advantage of it and now feels put out by not being given the complete power they had before.

Ron Paul buys into this and it doesn't represent the average American anymore.

This is but one example by the way.


How would you represent the average american on this matter?

yellowrose10's photo
Sat 04/04/09 10:14 PM
i see all kinds of holidays represented in stores here. for the record...not all christians celebrate christmas as a religious holiday. i celebrate it as tradition....frosty the snowman, rudolph, santa, etc

Drivinmenutz's photo
Sat 04/04/09 10:18 PM

From what I read on his site is, he's doing more of a presidential job than Obama.
Up to Date, informative, calling for actions that would benefit the people. Urging people to get involved by making phone calls and submitting protest letters to the Reps and Congress.
If he don't get too danged old and people wake up to the corruption going on from the Top down, he could be a choice Americans, not the Media, vote in.
On the other hand, if Obama and his crew screw up bad enough, Ron Paul could be the alternative to step in and represent the people.


drinker

yellowrose10's photo
Sat 04/04/09 10:22 PM
I'd voted for him...i haven't heard why not

Dragoness's photo
Sat 04/04/09 10:22 PM





So the fact that he wants people to be allowed to freely express their religion means that he is bringing religion into politics?

I ask, should muslim children not be allowed to pray at school when his or her religion requires?

All Ron Paul was asking for is tolerance. Did anyone else see anything different?


He is not asking for tolerance, he is asking for us to go back in time to a time of religious majority because he thinks it is a "better" time.

Republican equals stuck in the mud of old times not allowing for the changing humanity. We are not what we used to be any more and good riddance as far as I am concerned. There were way to many prejudice ideals in the old ways, too much religious dogma, etc.....

Ron Paul equals old stuck in the mud ideals that we have outgrown and need to dispel.


What specificly made you think he wanted us to use religion as a way of life again?


You see i got the impression that he was just promoting tolerance. Like allowing the muslims to pray when they need to. Allowing Christians to say merry christmas, etc. Instead of exercising a Phobia of religion by being forced to be religiously neutral. Wouldn't it be culturally educating to let people practice his or her own religions openly? As long as you are respectful.



The problem is they monopolize the holiday as if it theirs. They want Christmas stuff up but do put up ALL RELIGIOUS SYMBOLS OF THE HOLIDAY at their public displays. If you are respectful to ALL you have to include ALL, if not there can be nothing so that all religions are respected, understood?

He was not teaching tolerance, he was bashing those who will not allow the Christians the cart blance they are used to. You notice he states that " THE OLD TRADITIONS AND FEELING OF THE HOLIDAY ARE GONE". We have allowed Christianity too much power in this country and it has taken too much advantage of it and now feels put out by not being given the complete power they had before.

Ron Paul buys into this and it doesn't represent the average American anymore.

This is but one example by the way.


How would you represent the average american on this matter?


Because I know that all people have different beliefs I gladly wish all Happy Holidays to make sure they are covered in my message. I believe most Americans are at this point of intelligent understanding. Just for example.

Ron Paul does not believe this way and it is not representative of the majority.

FearandLoathing's photo
Sat 04/04/09 10:22 PM


here is a topic for boo.

why does Ron Paul dislike the current administration. are you pro Paul or anti-Paul?

debate

flowerforyou


I am pro-Paul.

Funny thing about him is the fact that he was just as against McCain, and the Bush administration as he is the Obama administration. It's Not the name he single's out, put the political philosophies and shadey legislation practices that he picks on.

To put it simply, Dr. Paul is a constitutionalist, who believes small government, fiscal responsibility, he wants the states to have more responsibility, and he believes firmly in civil liberties.

The current administration is almost axactly like the old one on every matter. They believe the constitution can and should be overridden at times (overriding civil liberties), they believe in big government with lots of controls and regulations,and they believe in lessening the state's powers and lots of rediculous spending.

Thats this administration, not necessarily Obama himself.


Yep, if I were to vote...Ron Paul would have had another vote, but I'm anarchist so I don't vote. Win or lose anymore we still get the same thing, no one really looks at the write-in candidates I wouldn't be surprised if most didn't even know what one was.

I'm an anarchist and I know that...

1 3 5 6 7 8 9 12 13